Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Muslims and the Indian state since 1947

Anwer Hussain



I could not resist the desire to write on this subject after the violence at Azad maidan on August 11, 2012, in Mumbai, and the competitive politics this event led to among rightist and identity seeking political parties in Maharashtra.
Now is the most appropriate time to analyse why certain sections of Muslims indulged in violence. What motivated them and why they directed their anger against state institutions and media?
First and foremost, I condemn the violence in the most strongest terms. Now comes the question, as to why it happened. On the surface it appears that certain sections of Muslims are unhappy with state institutions in the way they handled Bodo-Muslim clashes in Assam. Thousands of Muslim homes were burned by Bodo militants in order to drive them away. Many innocent people died in the clashes and government of Assam was lax in taking action against culprits.
In Burma, too, there was a massacre of Muslims and the government of India stood silent.
The Indian media on its part was not impartial in its coverage of both issues. So some people in Mumbai organised a protest rally to register their unhappiness and anger against the government of India and the Indian media. Unfortunately a group of miscreants entered the ground at the last moment and started attacking the media and the police.
Whatever may be the reasons or claims of people who participated in the rally, or even if it was a lie told to me, I am concerned with a different aspect altogether.
Do Muslims in India have a right to protest or not? Can’t they show their anger and disagreement if they think that the government is not behaving as it should be, or if an Indian state fails in its duty to protect Indian citizens? Because of delay in actions, thousands of homes were destroyed and many innocent lives lost in the aftermath of the clashes in Assam.
Our constitution gives every Indian citizen, cutting across ethnic, religious, caste or any denominational lines, the right to protest. So what is wrong with Muslims getting organised to voice their displeasure! Actually the problem is not about the constitutional right of Muslims as many Muslims feel betrayed by Indian state and democracy. The real question is why it happens with Indian Muslims post 1947? The problem is deep rooted. We can understand it through one example, that of Ram Janambhoomi and Babri Masjid controversy. In this issue the identity and political weight of Indian Muslims was at stake. The movement for Babri Masjid according to my understanding was not about the mosque, the Muslim leadership rather used itto test their political bargaining power in independent India. And this is the reason why after putting so much at stake, post the Masjid demolition Muslims continue to be in political wilderness. They simply do not know how to act politically? Their response towards the Indian state and politics is very immature and shows lack of understanding of Indian politics and the functioning of Indian democracy.
Muslims in India do not know how to relate themselves with Indian democracy, state and various ethnic and religious communities living in India. This is the reason right from 1947 they have been systematically and politically exploited by different political parties, at different times and places. Muslims are politically a confused lot today. And so, whenever they want to register their protest or try to use their democratic rights in India, they often end up making a mess of it. Azad Maidan rally is no exception!
Now comes the question why it happens only with Muslims. Many other communities in India have managed their affairs well. Dalits, for example, under the leadership of Baba Saheb Ambedkar managed themselves very well. Even in contemporary India, many dalit leaders are doing a fine job. But as far as Muslims are concerned, there are no worthwhile leaders who have organised Muslims on constructive issues.
For Muslim politicans, the important issues were related to the identity of Muslims in India, like the status of Urdu, freedom of religion, and non-interference in their relgious matters by either political party or the Indian state. It is important to note that after 1947, Muslims did not come out of their partition mentality. This includes a larger section of Muslims who actually did not participate in the partition movement. The fault lies with both secular political parties in India and Muslims. Till now I have not heard any Muslim political party, or groups, who talk of nation as a whole, or fights for the rights of different communities living in India cutting across religious lines.
Muslims in India, even after so many decades act as a persecuted minority. This is very wrong! Part of the blame lies with some Hindu brothers and sisters who have not been able to accept them as an equal citizen of India. Somewhere, at the subconscious level, they cannot see Muslims as true nationalists. This fact has been highlighted in several Hindi movies through characterisation of Muslims as police inspectors, etc.
Muslims on their part have failed to reassure the Hindus, that, if they participate in politics and make their own political outfit, it will never lead to partition of any part of our motherland. They need to come out of their siege mentality and fight for the rights of every citizen of India, only then people will have faith in their political organisations. Post independence, no Muslim political organisation stood for the rights of dalits, tribals, OBC or poorer sections of Indian society. Muslims have supported others time and again in their demands, but, have not taken any initiative in defending their rights. They always act as if their religion, culture and language are under perpetual threat from the Indian state and other communities living in India. I, personally, have failed to understand this psyche. There are so many Muslim countries in the the world, but still the fear lives here.
Muslims should rather reach out to other communities in India towards building a common platform for advancing different agendas of the nation, which are important for all of us be it environment, economy, polity, corruption, rights of the pooorer sections of the society, etc. I think the day Muslims start doing this, their isolation in Indian politics and society will end automatically.
The common question my Hindu friends ask me, is why Muslims are fighting for the rights of Burmese Muslims and not fight for the violation of the rights of Hindu and Christain minorities living in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt and different other Muslim countries around the world! A valid question indeed. I have never seen any Muslim organisations or individual who fought for the rights of minorities living in the different Muslim countries. We seem to have forgotten our cherished tradition from the early period of Islam, when no harm was done to minorities living under the Muslim dominion. Christians, Jews, Manichaeans, Zoroastrians and others used to be the most protected lot. It was Christians during Abbassid (755-1258 A.D.) period who were responsible for translating all the great works of Greeks into Arabic under the aegis of Bait-ul-Hikma founded in 762 A.D. We do not have any evidence of communal riots between Hindus and Muslims before 1857. Rulers during the Sultanat period (1206-1526 A.D.), and after, used to take loans from Hindu bankers in India.
The problem today is that Muslims themselves are not aware of their rich history and traditions. The Prophet of Islam made a famous agreement with Jews and others for peaceful living on reaching Medina. In fact, he never broke any of his contract under any circumstance, unless, others did it. How many of us know about the Medina agreement and principles it lays down for peaceful coexistence with other religious communities.
So the only way Muslims can break the cycle of isolation, siege mentality and political exploitation by so called secular parties who want us to remain ghettoised, is by deepening good relations with other communities living in India.
(Anwer Hussain is a writer and member of ‘The Center for Study of Society and Secularism’ in Mumbai)

Monday, August 27, 2012

Urdu Media On Mumbai Police Comm. Patnaik’s Transfer


The transfer of Arup Patnaik, Mumbai Police Commissioner, is seen with suspicion by the Urdu media. Though Maharashtra Home Minister Mr. R R Patil has maintained that Patnaik, for his good work, was promoted to the post of Managing Director of Maharashtra State Security Corporation, the media believes otherwise. The view of the media is that he has been punished for not being hard on Muslim youth who turned violent during the Azad Maidan demonstration on August 11.“Police Commissioner Arup Patnaik Transferred: Promotion or Punishment?” reads the news headline of daily Sahafat.
Similarly, a news analysis published in daily Urdu Times also concludes that Patnaik’s transfer was a punishment for him as he did not deal with the violent mob with firm hand. In the analysis titled “Patnaik’s transfer: victory of communalism and defeat of secularism” Shakeel Rasheed writes, “This is not ‘promotion’, but punishment. Yes, Arun Patnaik is not the Mumbai police commissioner anymore. The Congress-NCP alliance says that Patnaik’s transfer was routine and that it has nothing to do with the Azad Maidan violence. In fact, it is ‘punishment’ and not promotion. Punishment, because Patnaik stopped his forces to rain bullets on Muslims protesting against atrocities on Muslims in Assam and Myanmar, why only two people were killed, why the death tally not touched 200 or 250, why Patnaik ensured peace of Mumbai is not shattered and why he prevented the 1992-93 like situation.”
In the editorial Arun Patnaik Deserved Reward!  the paper adds, “Despite vandalism from some Muslim youth Patnaik did not allow his police to use force relentlessly. Instead, upto the last moment he asked them to have patience. He saved not only Mumbai but also whole the state from riots. His good handling of the situation foiled the expectations of Hindutva outfits. So these outfit alleged him of being soft on the vandalizing mob. They also demanded his resignation. ”
The protest rally called by Raza Academy in collaboration with some other Muslim organizations had suddenly turned violent. The mob went on rampage setting ablaze media OB vans, damaging public buses and attacking policemen. The vandalism left around 50 policemen injured. There were all efforts to incite the police including snatching their revolvers and molesting female policemen. The police could have resorted to heavy firing in retaliation, but it was Arup Patnaik who himself took the command and instructed the police to exercise restraint. The Urdu media which often complains of police bias against Muslims had praised the wise handling of the crowd.
Later the media reported a top police official confessing that had there not been extreme restraint on the part of the police, there would have been a ‘holocaust’.
From security expert B Raman to super cop Julio Ribeiro, everyone praised Patnaik’s handling of the explosive situation. “When Patnaik reached the spot after the mobs had gone on rampage, his first reflex was to ensure that his force did not add to the heat of the riots by losing its cool and over-reacting. If Patnaik had not kept its force under control, there might have been many more fatalities resulting in a serious aggravation of the situation. In literally forcing the policemen to keep their cool and not to overact, Patnaik had acted according to his professional instincts, the training that he had received as a young officer and his long years of experience in dealing with such situations. Let us give him the credit for the way he exercised his leadership during those critical moments when the riots could have spread to many parts of Mumbai,” wrote Raman.
This, however, was not what the some communal elements like. The families of the deceased youth did not complain except that why the police fired above the waste.  The pro-Hindutva parties including BJP, Shiv Sena and MNS, however, criticized Patnaik because he did not curb the mob forcefully and according to them allowed it to go on widespread vandalism. In a show of strength MNS chief Raj Thackeray defying police took out a huge rally protesting the riots.
The rally brought Raj Thackeray once again in the limelight. Giving a new twist to the Azad Maidan riots is a report in Sahafat daily “The Possible Hand of Raj Thackeray Group In Azad Maidan Violence” whichasks whether Muslim volunteers of MNS had staged the riots. The purpose: to provide Raj Thackeray with a chance for growing his stature. In the rally, Thackeray among many things demanded resignation of R R Patil and suspension of Arup Patnaik. Within less than two days, Patnaik was transferred.
The media and saffron parties of Maharashtra also criticized Patil for government’s failure in Pune Blast, Azad Maidan riots and MNS rally. Patil, however, transferred the police commissioner to cool the temper of critics.
Arup Patnaik has the reputation of being one of the most honest officers in the Mumbai police force. He would support the raids on bars and pubs, running beyond permissible time limits, by the Social Service Branch headed by assistant commissioner of police Vasant Dhoble. This action of the police though was supported many citizen groups, the liquor lobbies were not happy at all with it.
The immediate cause, however, for Patnaik’s removal was his failure to suppress the Azad Maidan rioters. “Is it the guilt of Patnaik that the police led by him showed restraint? Is he guilty of controlling the situation and not letting a violent accident turn into full fledge riot?” asks dailyInquilab in an editorial “The Guilt of Patnaik?”
The paper also quoted a local Muslim leader Maulana Mustaqeem Ahsan Azmi as having said, “The way Patnaik played on his life to control the citizens and the police, is laudable. Otherwise instead of two, two hundred would have been killed. Surprisingly, some people protested against him and he was removed. This shows weakness of the government.”
By giving in to the pressure from the opposition to remove Patnaik without substantial reason the government has sent a wrong message; the Urdu Media believes. This is like discouraging a duteous officer like him.

Sunday, August 19, 2012

Muslims condemn campaign against North-Eastern people; demand sources of sms’s be probed: The Milli Gazette

Muslims condemn campaign against North-Eastern people; demand sources of sms’s be probed

The Milli Gazette

New Delhi, Saturday, 18 August 2012: We, representatives of leading Muslim organizations in the country, unreservedly condemn the criminal and mischievous campaign against people of North Eastern origin in certain parts of the country like Karnataka and Maharashtra for which modern media like bulk email, text and video messaging is being used.

We also appeal to our respected Imams and Khateebs to avail the occasion of the Eid prayers and make an appeal to the Muslim masses in their sermons to maintain calm, peace and brotherhood. We also appeal to the Muslim masses to beware of the communal forces’ designs and remain vigilant to maintain peace and amity in their respective localities.

We also appeal to the Muslim community in the country and especially in the affected areas to cooperate and assure their brothers and sisters from North Eastern states that they are safe and secure and should not panic and leave their studies, jobs or businesses. Muslims should also offer the distressed persons to come and live in their houses and institutions until the situation becomes normal.

We request the concerned authorities in all affected areas to meticulously probe the source(s) of these sms’s and punish the guilty without mercy. We have reason to believe that this criminal campaign is orchestrated by the same people who are hell-bent to turn the present ethnic cleansing campaign in the Bodo Territorial Council areas into a foreigners and intruders’ issue, which it is not. We are reminded by a similar campaign in Assam in May 2005 which had affected lakhs of people. Assam chief minister Tarun Gogoi had at the time squarely blamed the BJP saying that the BJP and RSS are trying to foment communal tension in Assam. We hope the authorities will not develop cold feet in probing the origins of the present campaign and punishing them.

Dr Zafarul-Islam Khan, President, All India Muslim Majlis-e Mushawarat
Muhammad Jaafar, Vice President, Jamaat-e Islami Hind
Mujtaba Farooq, Convenor, Coordination Committee Indian Muslims on Assam
Abdul Khaliq, General Secretary, Lok Janshakti Party
Ml. Asghar Imam Mehdi, General Secretary, Markazi Jamiat Ahl-e Hadees
Ml. Abdul Hameed Nomani, Secretary, Jamiat Ulama-e Hind
Navaid Hamid, General Secretary, Movement for Empowerment of Muslim Indians
Dr Taslim Rahmani, President, Muslim Political Council
Dr Syed Qasim Rasool Ilyas, Member, Working Committee, Muslim Personal Law Board

URGENT-ATTENTION: PLAN TO ENGINEER MUSLIM VS DALIT-BUDDHIST RIOTS!!

Bharat Bachao Andolan
(Movement to Save India)
URGENT-ATTENTION: PLAN TO ENGINEER MUSLIM VS DALIT-BUDDHIST RIOTS!! 
WARNING TO ALL!! BE VIGILANT, DONT FALL INTO HATE CAMPAIGNS OR FALSEHOODS!!

There is a planned & concerted attempt by certain right-wing & state forces to create Muslim vs Dali-Buddhist riots. We appeal to the entire Dalit-Buddhist & Muslim community, as well all patriotic Indians. An anti-Buddhist sentiment is being fostered amongst the Indian Muslim community due to misinformation & sheer ignorance on Myanmar. 
Yesterday there was an attempt by Muslim youth in Lucknow to target Buddha statues. Also on facebook & sms - there are a lot of hate-messages being circulated. 2 Buddhist Viharas in Bombay have been stoned. The Dalit media & activists have kept all this under wraps & are not reporting it for now, so as to contain the rising tensions & anger. 
We thus appeal to the leaders & activists of both the Muslim & Dalit-0Buddhist communities to immediately come together, stand on 1 platform & expose this entire plan to engineer Muslim vs Dalit riots, which will then transform themselves into Muslim vs Hindu riots, and eventually it will be Muslims vs everybody else as we well know from decades of experience. 
Immediately after Eid, we are holding meetings & press conferences both in Bombay & in Lucknow to awaken the people about this design. Then we are launching a series of public meetings across Bombay especially in the Dalit & Muslim areas, so as to strengthen the existing unity of the Muslim & Dalit masses as well as that of the OBC & the working classes. We will also be meeting the CM both of Maharashtra & UP, with a meeting with the Police Commissioner to seek the cooperation of the state machinery to protect the people of all communities. 
The agenda is very clear as the ruling elite in the Congress & BJP require riots to polarise the electorate along Hindu & Muslim lines as we head for the general elections of 2014. With the economy floundering, the mega scams of unprecedented amounts of money, rising prices & a general anger & seething discontent seething amongst the masses, the ruling elite will resort to their timeless strategy of fomenting nationwide riots, as we head for the general elections of 2014. 
The ongoing month long pogroms in Assam, more than 40 riots in Uttar Pradesh, the mob violence in Bombay, Kanpur & Lucknow & the fear & hate-campaign against the students of the North-East & the Dalit Buddhists. With the attendant fall-out of the isolation of the Muslim community is a recipe for a massive disaster & planned pogroms on a scale that will surpass the Gujarat genocide, as since then the right-wing Manuwadi militias are far better equipped, well trained & organized. If the Muslim community & their allies in the larger Indian secular society, especially the Dalits & OBC's are not taken into confidence, if the Muslim leadership & youth don't start behaving in a politically mature manner, we are in for real spell of anti-Muslim riots that will not be contained as they will spread like wild fire across the entire nation. And a nation that has already been prepared to believe the worst due to the dominant paradigm on the politics of terror that pervades our media & our security establishment.
So lets wake up & start the process of countering the nefarious design by reaching out to all the communities, by creating awareness & by mobilising & organizing at the bastis across our cities, towns & villages. Since the dark days of 1992-93 & the Gujarat genocide, we have learnt our lessons with much pain & blood. Now there is far more communication at the grass-roots where leaders & activists can counter hate & rumour mongering, but there is a limit, a limit if the state itself has deicded to plan & foment the riots. A pall of fear looms large & hate campaigns are visible over the internet & the media, thus the odds against us are truly enormous. 
But we have faith - faith in the people of India, faith in the basic secular ethos of India & an undying optimism & hope.
Thus lets awaken before its too late.
Feroze Mithiborwala & Kishore Jagtap
(National Convenors) 

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

INDIA - Happy Independence Day!



By Mike Ghouse for www.newageislam.com
August 15, 2012
My Dear fellow Indians,
An Indian is an Indian is an Indian, period.
We are Indians and nothing but Indian.
We are Adivasis, Atheists, Bahais, Bos, Buddhists, Christians, Dalits, Hindus, Jains, Jewish, Muslim, Sikhs, Tribals, Zoroastrians and every possible grouping. We are Brown, Black, White, Yellow and green with envy and phir bhi dil hai Hindustani (our heart is Indian).
Our Motherland is represented by every race, nationality, ethnicity, language, culture and religion. We see God as one, none and many; and in every form; male, female, genderless and non-existent, being and non-being, nameless and with innumerable names.
We are proud of our heritage - a multi-faith, multi-cultural, multi-regional and multi-linguistic society, where we have come to accept and respect every which way people have lived their lives. For over 5000 years, India has been a beacon of pluralism - it has embraced Islam, Christianity, Judaism, Baha’i and Zoroastrianism to include in the array of the indigenous religions; Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism. 
We may want to consciously start thinking and acting as one people, one people within a nation and a community and one people globally. It’s like home when we are conflict free.  I do hope each one of us purges any bias towards the other, there is joy in being free from ill-will. Try to be free from it this day forward… free from anything that prevents you from being a part of the whole.
Our combined philosophies believe in one world ; Hinduism describes the world as Vasudaiva Kutumbukum, the whole world is one family, the idea of Ek Onkar(one) in Sikhism, you are all created from the same couple as Quraan puts it and Jesus embraced every one regardless of who any one is... similar philosophies are grounded in all our religions.
A few don't follow their own heritage and resort to theivary, loot, murder, terrorism, rioting, rapes, infanticide and other evils that destroy the fabric of the society,  but a majority of every group goes about their own way, living their life with struggles and ease and don't even bother others. We should build upon the 99% of population and not on the less than 1% that does not follow any principles.
On this day, and every day from here forward, make a pledge to yourselves to talk about in terms of we Indians - and not Malyalee, Gujarati, Bengali.... or Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Isaee. Don't expect others to jump and say the same, give them the time and if you are consistent for at least a year, you will see others emulating you.
India led the way to the freedom movement, since 1947 every country has been liberated from colonialism. Indian democracy is a shining example to the world, where the people have peacefully transferred the powers. Indians are inherently secular and economically capitalistic. They believe in "live-and-let-live" life style, which is the essence of capitalism.
Through the years we have expressed the highest degree of maturity on handling extreme situations; the more divergent opinions we hear, the larger our heart grows, the bigger our embrace would be and we can cushion more differences. Let’s continue to honor the concept that there is always another side to the story, as finding the truth is our own responsibility. I am proud of my heritage and am proud to be an Indian-American.
INDIAN PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
With the belief that every Indian wants justice to every human being; rich or poor, connected or not, and demands fair treatment of every one of the 1.1 Billion Indians, we must come to grips with the social and community life to create an exemplary India, that will become a model nation in the world.
We have to give room to the extremists in every section of our communities be it Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jain, Muslim, Jewish, Sikh, Zoroastrian or other, hoping they would recognize the God given space to each one of us and eventually see the benefits of co-existence.
I propose that the parliament of India introduce a bill for every political, cultural and religious organization in India to register with the Home Ministry, state their purpose, list their assets for public scrutiny, list the membership roster to be updated annually. Include a modified version of the 7 items into Indian Penal Code, and make it in to the law to punish the violators of the law.
Patriotism should be defined in terms of what you do to uplift the hopes of people, in terms of education to all, jobs to as many as we can in each successive year, home for every human, and a better life style to every Indian.
Every public office holder from the Peon to the President of India, and every one in between must take this pledge and live by it. Violation should disqualify him or her from holding the public office. Let it be monitored publicly.
1. I pledge allegiance to India, the nation that stands for liberty and justice for all.
2. I pledge that I honor and treat every Indian with "full" dignity.
3. I pledge that all individuals would be treated on par.
4. I pledge that I will treat all religions with equal respect, equal access and equal treatment.
5. I pledge that I will oppose any act that treats any Indian less than myself.
6. I Pledge that I will work for a India, where every individual can live with security and aspire for prosperity.
7. I pledge that I will protect, preserve and value every inch of India and every human soul in India
This would be the first step towards ensuring a Just, peaceful and prosperous India, that can sustain its progress and peace.
Jai Hind
 









Mike Ghouse is committed to building a Cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day. He is a professional speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, civic affairs, Islam, India, Israel, peace and justice. Mike is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News and regularly at Huffington post, and several other periodicals across the world. The blog www.TheGhousediary.comis updated daily.

DAY OF JERUSALEM / YAU-ME-QUDS


PUBLIC MEETING

BHARAT BACHAO ANDOLAN

On the occasion of Yau-me-Quds / Day of Jerusalem, that is celebrated the world over on the last Friday of Ramzan, you are cordially invited to attend the programme, which will also be followed by Iftaar. An award wining documentary, “Jerusalem – The East Side Story” will also be screened along with an exhibition as well.

The youth from our city that have been part of both the historic “Asia to Gaza Convoy” & the “Global March to Jerusalem”, will also be felicitated in a small ceremony.

We must stand in solidarity with the Palestinian nation & join the global struggle to save Jerusalem, which symbolises the universal spiritual heritage of all of humanity.

Venue: Islam Gymkhana, near Marine Lines Station, Mumbai.

Date: Friday 17th of August 2012 / Time: 3.30pm to 7.00pm

Chief Guest: Mr. Muhammad  Bagar Bagei (Consul General of Iran)

Guests of Honour: Brigadier Sudhir Sawant, Advocate Yusuf Muchala, & Mr. SS Yadav

Keynote Address: Feroze Mithiborwala

Speakers: Com. Prakash Reddy, Aslam Ghazi, Maulana Zaheer Abbas Rizvi, Com. Sanjay Singhvi, Maulana Hakim Mehmood Dariyabadi, Kishore Jagtap, Sarfaraz Arzu, Maulana Hafiz Atahar Ali, Pradeep Dhoble, Maulana Sher Muhammad Jafri, Meraj Siddiqui, Ghulam Peshimam, Alhaj Badruzamman & Farid Khan

RSVP: Yawar Ali Qazi (9679314886), Janab Faruqi (9819059319),  & Aarti Badekar(9322108219)

Maulana Abul Kalam Azad: The Man Who Knew The Future Of Pakistan Before Its Creation



by Shorish Kashmiri,  Matbooat Chattan, Lahore

Congress president Maulana Abul Kalam Azad gave the following interview to journalist Shorish Kashmiri for a Lahore based Urdu magazine, Chattan, in April 1946. It was a time when the Cabinet Mission was holding its proceedings in Delhi and Simla. Azad made some startling predictions during the course of the interview, saying that religious conflict would tear apart Pakistan and its eastern half would carve out its own future. He even said that Pakistan’s incompetent rulers might pave the way for military rule.
According to Shorish Kashmiri, Azad had earmarked the early hours of the morning for him and the interview was conducted over a period of two weeks. This interview has not been published in any book so far — neither in the Azad centenary volumes nor in any other book comprising his writing or speeches — except for Kashmiri’s own book Abul Kalam Azad, which was printed only once by Matbooat Chattan Lahore, a now-defunct publishing house. Former Union Cabinet Minister Arif Mohammed Khan discovered the book after searching for many years and translated the interview for COVERT

Q: The Hindu Muslim dispute has become so acute that it has foreclosed any possibility of reconciliation. Don’t you think that in this situation the birth of Pakistan has become inevitable?
A: If Pakistan were the solution of Hindu Muslim problem, then I would have extended my support to it. A section of Hindu opinion is now turning in its favour. By conceding NWFP, Sind, Balochistan and half of Punjab on one side and half of Bengal on the other, they think they will get the rest of India — a huge country that would be free from any claims of communal nature. If we use the Muslim League terminology, this new India will be a Hindu state both practically and temperamentally.
This will not happen as a result of any conscious decision, but will be a logical consequence of its social realities. How can you expect a society that consists 90% of Hindus, who have lived with their ethos and values since prehistoric times, to grow differently? The factors that laid the foundation of Islam in Indian society and created a powerful following have become victim of the politics of partition. The communal hatred it has generated has completely extinguished all possibilities of spreading and preaching Islam. This communal politics has hurt the religion beyond measure. Muslims have turned away from the Quran. If they had taken their lessons from the Quran and the life of the Holy Prophet and had not forged communal politics in the name of religion then Islam’s growth would not have halted. By the time of the decline of the Mughal rule, the Muslims in India were a little over 22.5 million, that is about 65% of the present numbers.
Since then the numbers kept increasing. If the Muslim politicians had not used the offensive language that embittered communal relations, and the other section acting as agents of British interests had not worked to widen the Hindu-Muslim breach, the number of Muslims in India would have grown higher. The political disputes we created in the name of religion have projected Islam as an instrument of political power and not what it is — a value system meant for the transformation of human soul. Under British influence, we turned Islam into a confined system, and following in the footsteps of other communities like Jews, Parsis and Hindus we transformed ourselves into a hereditary community.
The Indian Muslims have frozen Islam and its message and divided themselves into many sects. Some sects were clearly born at the instance of colonial power. Consequently, these sects became devoid of all movement and dynamism and lost faith in Islamic values. The hallmark of Muslim existence was striving and now the very term is strange to them. Surely they are Muslims, but they follow their own whims and desires. In fact now they easily submit to political power, not to Islamic values. They prefer the religion of politics not the religion of the Quran. Pakistan is a political standpoint.
Regardless of the fact whether it is the right solution to the problems of Indian Muslims, it is being demanded in the name of Islam. The question is when and where Islam provided for division of territories to settle populations on the basis of belief and unbelief. Does this find any sanction in the Quran or the traditions of the Holy Prophet? Who among the scholars of Islam has divided the dominion of God on this basis? If we accept this division in principle, how shall we reconcile it with Islam as a universal system?
How shall we explain the ever growing Muslim presence in non-Muslim lands including India? Do they realise that if Islam had approved this principle then it would not have permitted its followers to go to the non-Muslim lands and many ancestors of the supporters of Pakistan would not have had even entered the fold of Islam?
Division of territories on the basis of religion is a contraption devised by Muslim League. They can pursue it as their political agenda, but it finds no sanction in Islam or Quran. What is the cherished goal of a devout Muslim? Spreading the light of Islam or dividing territories along religious lines to pursue political ambitions? The demand for Pakistan has not benefited Muslims in any manner. How Pakistan can benefit Islam is a moot question and will largely depend on the kind of leadership it gets.
The impact of western thought and philosophy has made the crisis more serious. The way the leadership of Muslim League is conducting itself will ensure that Islam will become a rare commodity in Pakistan and Muslims in India. This is a surmise and God alone knows what is in the womb of future. Pakistan, when it comes into existence, will face conflicts of religious nature.
As far as I can see, the people who will hold the reins of power will cause serious damage to Islam. Their behaviour may result in the total alienation of the Pakistani youth who may become a part of non-religious movements. Today, in Muslim minority states the Muslim youth are more attached to religion than in Muslim majority states. You will see that despite the increased role of Ulema, the religion will lose its sheen in Pakistan.

Q: But many Ulema are with Quaid-e-Azam [M.A. Jinnah].
A: Many Ulema were with Akbare Azam too; they invented a new religion for him. Do not discuss individuals. Our history is replete with the doings of the Ulema who have brought humiliation and disgrace to Islam in every age and period.
The upholders of truth are exceptions. How many of the Ulema find an honourable mention in the Muslim history of the last 1,300 years? There was one Imam Hanbal, one Ibn Taimiyya. In India we remember no Ulema except Shah Waliullah and his family. The courage of Alf Sani is beyond doubt, but those who filled the royal office with complaints against him and got him imprisoned were also Ulema. Where are they now? Does anybody show any respect to them?

Q: Maulana, what is wrong if Pakistan becomes a reality? After all, “Islam” is being used to pursue and protect the unity of the community.
A: You are using the name of Islam for a cause that is not right by Islamic standards. Muslim history bears testimony to many such enormities. In the battle of Jamal [fought between Imam Ali and Hadrat Aisha, widow of the Holy Prophet] Qurans were displayed on lances. Was that right? In Karbala the family members of the Holy Prophet were martyred by those Muslims who claimed companionship of the Prophet. Was that right? Hajjaj was a Muslim general and he subjected the holy mosque at Makka to brutal attack. Was that right? No sacred words can justify or sanctify a false motive.
If Pakistan was right for Muslims then I would have supported it. But I see clearly the dangers inherent in the demand. I do not expect people to follow me, but it is not possible for me to go against the call of my conscience. People generally submit either to coercion or to the lessons of their experience. Muslims will not hear anything against Pakistan unless they experience it. Today they can call white black, but they will not give up Pakistan. The only way it can be stopped now is either for the government not to concede it or for Mr Jinnah himself — if he agrees to some new proposal.
Now as I gather from the attitude of my own colleagues in the working committee, the division of India appears to be certain. But I must warn that the evil consequences of partition will not affect India alone, Pakistan will be equally haunted by them. The partition will be based on the religion of the population and not based on any natural barrier like mountain, desert or river. A line will be drawn; it is difficult to say how durable it would be.
We must remember that an entity conceived in hatred will last only as long as that hatred lasts. This hatred will overwhelm the relations between India and Pakistan. In this situation it will not be possible for India and Pakistan to become friends and live amicably unless some catastrophic event takes place. The politics of partition itself will act as a barrier between the two countries. It will not be possible for Pakistan to accommodate all the Muslims of India, a task beyond her territorial capability. On the other hand, it will not be possible for the Hindus to stay especially in West Pakistan. They will be thrown out or leave on their own. This will have its repercussions in India and the Indian Muslims will have three options before them:
1. They become victims of loot and brutalities and migrate to Pakistan; but how many Muslims can find shelter there?
2. They become subject to murder and other excesses. A substantial number of Muslims will pass through this ordeal until the bitter memories of partition are forgotten and the generation that had lived through it completes its natural term.
3. A good number of Muslims, haunted by poverty, political wilderness and regional depredation decide to renounce Islam.
The prominent Muslims who are supporters of Muslim League will leave for Pakistan. The wealthy Muslims will take over the industry and business and monopolise the economy of Pakistan. But more than 30 million Muslims will be left behind in India. What promise Pakistan holds for them? The situation that will arise after the expulsion of Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan will be still more dangerous for them. Pakistan itself will be afflicted by many serious problems. The greatest danger will come from international powers who will seek to control the new country, and with the passage of time this control will become tight. India will have no problem with this outside interference as it will sense danger and hostility from Pakistan.
The other important point that has escaped Mr Jinnah’s attention is Bengal. He does not know that Bengal disdains outside leadership and rejects it sooner or later. During World War II, Mr Fazlul Haq revolted against Jinnah and was thrown out of the Muslim League. Mr H.S. Suhrawardy does not hold Jinnah in high esteem. Why only Muslim League, look at the history of Congress. The revolt of Subhas Chandra Bose is known to all. Gandhiji was not happy with the presidentship of Bose and turned the tide against him by going on a fast unto death at Rajkot. Subhas Bose rose against Gandhiji and disassociated himself from the Congress. The environment of Bengal is such that it disfavours leadership from outside and rises in revolt when it senses danger to its rights and interests.
The confidence of East Pakistan will not erode as long as Jinnah and Liaquat Ali are alive. But after them any small incident will create resentment and disaffection. I feel that it will not be possible for East Pakistan to stay with West Pakistan for any considerable period of time. There is nothing common between the two regions except that they call themselves Muslims. But the fact of being Muslim has never created durable political unity anywhere in the world. The Arab world is before us; they subscribe to a common religion, a common civilisation and culture and speak a common language.
In fact they acknowledge even territorial unity. But there is no political unity among them. Their systems of government are different and they are often engaged in mutual recrimination and hostility. On the other hand, the language, customs and way of life of East Pakistan are totally different from West Pakistan. The moment the creative warmth of Pakistan cools down, the contradictions will emerge and will acquire assertive overtones. These will be fuelled by the clash of interests of international powers and consequently both wings will separate.
After the separation of East Pakistan, whenever it happens, West Pakistan will become the battleground of regional contradictions and disputes. The assertion of sub-national identities of Punjab, Sind, Frontier and Balochistan will open the doors for outside interference. It will not be long before the international powers use the diverse elements of Pakistani political leadership to break the country on the lines of Balkan and Arab states. Maybe at that stage we will ask ourselves, what have we gained and what have we lost.
The real issue is economic development and progress, it certainly is not religion. Muslim business leaders have doubts about their own ability and competitive spirit. They are so used to official patronage and favours that they fear new freedom and liberty. They advocate the two-nation theory to conceal their fears and want to have a Muslim state where they have the monopoly to control the economy without any competition from competent rivals. It will be interesting to watch how long they can keep this deception alive.

I feel that right from its inception, Pakistan will face some very serious problems:
1. The incompetent political leadership will pave the way for military dictatorship as it has happened in many Muslim countries.
2. The heavy burden of foreign debt.
3. Absence of friendly relationship with neighbours and the possibility of armed conflict.
4. Internal unrest and regional conflicts.
5. The loot of national wealth by the neo-rich and industrialists of Pakistan.
6. The apprehension of class war as a result of exploitation by the neo-rich.
7. The dissatisfaction and alienation of the youth from religion and the collapse of the theory of Pakistan.
8. The conspiracies of the international powers to control Pakistan.
In this situation, the stability of Pakistan will be under strain and the Muslim countries will be in no position to provide any worthwhile help. The assistance from other sources will not come without strings and it will force both ideological and territorial compromises.

Q: But the question is how Muslims can keep their community identity intact and how they can inculcate the attributes of the citizens of a Muslim state.
A: Hollow words cannot falsify the basic realities nor slanted questions can make the answers deficient. It amounts to distortion of the discourse. What is meant by community identity? If this community identity has remained intact during the British slavery, how will it come under threat in a free India in whose affairs Muslims will be equal participants? What attributes of the Muslim state you wish to cultivate?
The real issue is the freedom of faith and worship and who can put a cap on that freedom. Will independence reduce the 90 million Muslims into such a helpless state that they will feel constrained in enjoying their religious freedom? If the British, who as a world power could not snatch this liberty, what magic or power do the Hindus have to deny this freedom of religion? These questions have been raised by those, who, under the influence of western culture, have renounced their own heritage and are now raising dust through political gimmickry.
Muslim history is an important part of Indian history. Do you think the Muslim kings were serving the cause of Islam? They had a nominal relationship with Islam; they were not Islamic preachers. Muslims of India owe their gratitude to Sufis, and many of these divines were treated by the kings very cruelly.
Most of the kings created a large band of Ulema who were an obstacle in the path of the propagation of Islamic ethos and values. Islam, in its pristine form, had a tremendous appeal and in the first century won the hearts and minds of a large number of people living in and around Hejaz. But the Islam that came to India was different, the carriers were non-Arabs and the real spirit was missing. Still, the imprint of the Muslim period is writ large on the culture, music, art, architecture and languages of India. What do the cultural centres of India, like Delhi and Lucknow, represent? The underlying Muslim spirit is all too obvious.
If the Muslims still feel under threat and believe that they will be reduced to slavery in free India then I can only pray for their faith and hearts. If a man becomes disenchanted with life he can be helped to revival, but if someone is timid and lacks courage, then it is not possible to help him become brave and gutsy. The Muslims as a community have become cowards. They have no fear of God, instead they fear men. This explains why they are so obsessed with threats to their existence — a figment of their imagination.
After British takeover, the government committed all possible excesses against the Muslims. But Muslims did not cease to exist. On the contrary, they registered a growth that was more than average. The Muslim cultural ethos and values have their own charm. Then India has large Muslim neighbours on three sides. Why on earth the majority in this country will be interested to wipe out the Muslims? How will it promote their self interests? Is it so easy to finish 90 million people? In fact, Muslim culture has such attraction that I shall not be surprised if it comes to have the largest following in free India.
The world needs both, a durable peace and a philosophy of life. If the Hindus can run after Marx and undertake scholarly studies of the philosophy and wisdom of the West, they do not disdain Islam and will be happy to benefit from its principles. In fact they are more familiar with Islam and acknowledge that Islam does not mean parochialism of a hereditary community or a despotic system of governance.
Islam is a universal call to establish peace on the basis of human equality. They know that Islam is the proclamation of a Messenger who calls to the worship of God and not his own worship. Islam means freedom from all social and economic discriminations and reorganisation of society on three basic principles of God-consciousness, righteous action and knowledge.
In fact, it is we Muslims and our extremist behaviour that has created an aversion among non-Muslims for Islam. If we had not allowed our selfish ambitions to soil the purity of Islam then many seekers of truth would have found comfort in the bosom of Islam. Pakistan has nothing to do with Islam; it is a political demand that is projected by Muslim League as the national goal of Indian Muslims. I feel it is not the solution to the problems Muslims are facing. In fact it is bound to create more problems.
The Holy Prophet has said, “God has made the whole earth a mosque for me.” Now do not ask me to support the idea of the partition of a mosque. If the nine-crore Muslims were thinly scattered all over India, and demand was made to reorganise the states in a manner to ensure their majority in one or two regions, that was understandable. Again such a demand would not have been right from an Islamic viewpoint, but justifiable on administrative grounds.
But the situation, as it exists, is drastically different. All the border states of India have Muslim majorities sharing borders with Muslim countries.
Tell me, who can eliminate these populations? By demanding Pakistan we are turning our eyes away from the history of the last 1,000 years and, if I may use the League terminology, throwing more than 30 million Muslims into the lap of “Hindu Raj”. The Hindu Muslim problem that has created political tension between Congress and League will become a source of dispute between the two states and with the aid of international powers this may erupt into full scale war anytime in future.
The question is often raised that if the idea of Pakistan is so fraught with dangers for the Muslims, why is it being opposed by the Hindus? I feel that the opposition to the demand is coming from two quarters. One is represented by those who genuinely feel concerned about imperial machinations and strongly believe that a free, united India will be in a better position to defend itself.
On the other hand, there is a section who opposes Pakistan with the motive to provoke Muslims to become more determined in their demand and thus get rid of them. Muslims have every right to demand constitutional safeguards, but partition of India cannot promote their interests. The demand is the politically incorrect solution of a communal problem.
In future India will be faced with class problems, not communal disputes; the conflict will be between capital and labour. The communist and socialist movements are growing and it is not possible to ignore them. These movements will increasingly fight for the protection of the interest of the underclass.
The Muslim capitalists and the feudal classes are apprehensive of this impending threat. Now they have given this whole issue a communal colour and have turned the economic issue into a religious dispute. But Muslims alone are not responsible for it. This strategy was first adopted by the British government and then endorsed by the political minds of Aligarh. Later, Hindu short-sightedness made matters worse and now freedom has become contingent on the partition of India.
Jinnah himself was an ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity. In one Congress session Sarojini Naidu had commended him with this title. He was a disciple of Dadabhai Naoroji. He had refused to join the 1906 deputation of Muslims that initiated communal politics in India. In 1919 he stood firmly as a nationalist and opposed Muslim demands before the Joint Select Committee.
On 3 October 1925, in a letter to the Times of India he rubbished the suggestion that Congress is a Hindu outfit. In the All Parties Conferences of 1925 and 1928, he strongly favoured a joint electorate. While speaking at the National Assembly in 1925, he said, “I am a nationalist first and a nationalist last” and exhorted his colleagues, be they Hindus or Muslims, “not to raise communal issues in the House and help make the Assembly a national institution in the truest sense of the term”.
In 1928, Jinnah supported the Congress call to boycott Simon Commission. Till 1937, he did not favour the demand to partition India. In his message to various student bodies he stressed the need to work for Hindu Muslim unity. But he felt aggrieved when the Congress formed governments in seven states and ignored the Muslim League. In 1940 he decided to pursue the partition demand to check Muslim political decline.
In short, the demand for Pakistan is his response to his own political experiences. Mr Jinnah has every right to his opinion about me, but I have no doubts about his intelligence. As a politician he has worked overtime to fortify Muslim communalism and the demand for Pakistan. Now it has become a matter of prestige for him and he will not give it up at any cost.

Q: It is clear that Muslims are not going to turn away from their demand for Pakistan. Why have they become so impervious to all reason and logic of arguments?
A: It is difficult, rather impossible, to fight against the misplaced enthusiasm of a mob, but to suppress one’s conscience is worse than death. Today the Muslims are not walking, they are flowing. The problem is that Muslims have not learnt to walk steady; they either run or flow with the tide. When a group of people lose confidence and self-respect, they are surrounded by imaginary doubts and dangers and fail to make a distinction between the right and the wrong.
The true meaning of life is realised not through numerical strength but through firm faith and righteous action. British politics has sown many seeds of fear and distrust in the mental field of Muslims. Now they are in a frightful state, bemoaning the departure of the British and demanding partition before the foreign masters leave. Do they believe that partition will avert all the dangers to their lives and bodies? If these dangers are real then they will still haunt their borders and any armed conflict will result in much greater loss of lives and possessions.

Q: But Hindus and Muslims are two different nations with different and disparate inclinations. How can the unity between the two be achieved?
A: This is an obsolete debate. I have seen the correspondence between Allama Iqbal and Maulana Husain Ahmad Madni on the subject. In the Quran the term qaum has been used not only for the community of believers but has also been used for distinct human groupings generally. What do we wish to achieve by raising this debate about the etymological scope of terms like millat [community], qaum [nation] and ummat [group]? In religious terms India is home to many people — the Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Parsis, Sikhs etc.
The differences between Hindu religion and Islam are vast in scope. But these differences cannot be allowed to become an obstacle in the path of India gaining her freedom nor do the two distinct and different systems of faith negate the idea of unity of India. The issue is of our national independence and how we can secure it. Freedom is a blessing and is the right of every human being. It cannot be divided on the basis of religion.
Muslims must realise that they are bearers of a universal message. They are not a racial or regional grouping in whose territory others cannot enter. Strictly speaking, Muslims in India are not one community; they are divided among many well-entrenched sects. You can unite them by arousing their anti-Hindu sentiment but you cannot unite them in the name of Islam. To them Islam means undiluted loyalty to their own sect.
Apart from Wahhabi, Sunni and Shia there are innumerable groups who owe allegiance to different saints and divines. Small issues like raising hands during the prayer and saying Amen loudly have created disputes that defy solution. The Ulema have used the instrument of takfeer [fatwas declaring someone as infidel] liberally. Earlier, they used to take Islam to the disbelievers; now they take away Islam from the believers. Islamic history is full of instances of how good and pious Muslims were branded kafirs. Prophets alone had the capability to cope with these mindboggling situations. Even they had to pass through times of afflictions and trials. The fact is that when reason and intelligence are abandoned and attitudes become fossilised then the job of the reformer becomes very difficult.
But today the situation is worse than ever. Muslims have become firm in their communalism; they prefer politics to religion and follow their worldly ambitions as commands of religion. History bears testimony to the fact that in every age we ridiculed those who pursued the good with consistency, snuffed out the brilliant examples of sacrifice and tore the flags of selfless service. Who are we, the ordinary mortals; even high ranking Prophets were not spared by these custodians of traditions and customs.

Q: You closed down your journal Al-Hilal a long time back. Was it due to your disappointment with the Muslims who were wallowing in intellectual desolation, or did you feel like proclaiming azan [call to prayer] in a barren desert?
A: I abandoned Al-Hilal not because I had lost faith in its truth. This journal created great awareness among a large section of Muslims. They renewed their faith in Islam, in human freedom and in consistent pursuit of righteous goals. In fact my own life was greatly enriched by this experience and I felt like those who had the privilege of learning under the companionship of the Messenger of God.
My own voice entranced me and under its impact I burnt out like a phoenix. Al-Hilal had served its purpose and a new age was dawning. Based on my experiences, I made a reappraisal of the situation and decided to devote all my time and energy for the attainment of our national freedom. I was firm in my belief that freedom of Asia and Africa largely depends on India’s freedom and Hindu Muslim unity is key to India’s freedom.
Even before the First World War, I had realised that India was destined to attain freedom, and no power on earth would be able to deny it. I was also clear in my mind about the role of Muslims. I ardently wished that Muslims would learn to walk together with their countrymen and not give an opportunity to history to say that when Indians were fighting for their independence, Muslims were looking on as spectators. Let nobody say that instead of fighting the waves they were standing on the banks and showing mirth on the drowning of boats carrying the freedom fighters [¼].
Courtesy: Covert Magazine